Ron Paul #2 in NH … Democratic Primary!
By Bill McGonigle • 2012/01/12
Everybody already knows that Ron Paul placed second in the New Hampshire 2012 Republican Presidental Primary. But, at 7 o’clock tonight, the New Hampshire Secretary of State published the full results of the primary, including write-ins, and Ron Paul also won the #2 spot in the Democratic Primary.
To be sure, sitting President Barack Obama bested Paul with a 49,480 to 2,273 tally, but that Ron Paul placed so highly in rank tells us a few things. First, nearly twenty-three hundred New Hampshire voters got out and drove to a polling station, knowing they were going to cast a write-in vote, knowing that it was in a primary where no delegates could be assigned to write-in votes, but as a straight protest vote.
Given the insignificance of the voting act under these rules, it is reasonable to assume that many dissatisfied voters stayed home. The numbers bear this out. NH has 223,151 registered Democratic voters, and only 60,996 (27%) turned out. Secretary of State Bill Gardner had predicted a turnout of 75,000 voters in the Democratic Primary. Were write-ins valid for delegate assignment, the numbers would have likely been even higher.
Second, Ron Paul is the second most popular candidate among Democrat voters in NH. This will be crucially important when the general election rolls around. Ron Paul already won 50% of the Independent vote in the Republican primary. The ability to build consensus and pull in Independent and other-party voters is essential to achieve a victory in the general election. […]
Ron Paul’s strong support among Democrats can be tied to many issues. From his strong anti-war message to his assessment of the obvious failure of the drug war, his fight for racial equality in the justice system, his battle against inflation or his unique budget plan which fully funds Social Security, Medicare, and Veterans’ benefits (without relying on the continuing willingness of China to buy US debt as the other candidates’ plans do) – Ron Paul’s platform delivers what many Democratic candidates only pay lip service to. … Full article
US drone strike kills 6 in NW Pakistan
Press TV – January 12, 2012
At least six people have been killed in the latest non-UN-sanctioned US assassination drone strike in the northwestern tribal belt of Pakistan near the border with Afghanistan.
Intelligence officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the US unmanned aircraft fired two missiles at two cars in the Dogga area of North Waziristan tribal region, killing six.
“The missiles hit two cars that were heading towards the border. Several foreigners were in the cars, but we have no information on their nationalities yet,” an unnamed intelligence source said.
The strike comes two days after a similar attack killed four people in the North Waziristan tribal region.
Tuesday’s incident marked the resumption of the non-UN-sanctioned US drone campaign in Pakistan, which was paused after a NATO cross-border attack killed 24 Pakistani troops on November 26, 2011.
Meanwhile, Pakistan said on Thursday it can never condone violation of its sovereignty by the US drone strikes.
“Our position on drone attacks has always been very clear. We are of the view that strategic disadvantages outweigh tactical advantages of drone strikes,” Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesman Abdul Basit said.
He added that winning the hearts and minds of the people is crucial to win against violent extremism and this cannot happen if the collateral damage continues.
“Then there is the issue of violation of our sovereignty which we can never condone,” Basit said.
The US regularly carries out attacks by unmanned aircraft on Pakistan’s tribal regions, claiming the airstrikes target pro-Taliban militants. But locals say civilians are the main victims of the non-UN-sanctioned US strikes.
The aerial attacks, initiated by former US President George W. Bush, have escalated under President Barack Obama.
While the US government has always declined to publicly discuss its aerial attacks in Pakistan, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta admitted last October the US is fighting a war in Pakistan by using the drones.
Clinton Revives Dubious Charge of “Covert” Iranian Nuclear Site
By GARETH PORTER | CounterPunch | January 12, 2012
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s charge Tuesday that Iran had intended to keep the Fordow site secret until it was revealed by Western intelligence revived a claim the Barack Obama administration made in September 2009.
Clinton said Iran “only declared the Qom facility to the IAEA after it was discovered by the international community following three years of covert construction.” She also charged that there is no “plausible reason” for Iran to enrich to a 20 per cent level at the Fordow plant, implying that the only explanation is an intent to make nuclear weapons.
Clinton’s charges were part of a coordinated U.S.-British attack on Iran’s enrichment at Fordow. British Foreign Minister William Hague also argued that Fordow is too small to support a civilian power program. Hague also referred to its “location and clandestine nature”, saying they “raise serious questions about its ultimate purpose”. The Clinton-Hague suggestions that the Fordow site must be related to an effort to obtain nuclear weapons appear to be aimed at counterbalancing Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta’s statement only two days earlier that Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons.
The Clinton and Hague statements recalled a briefing for reporters during the Pittsburgh G20 summit meeting Sep. 25, 2009, at which a “senior administration official” asserted that Iran had informed the IAEA about the Fordow site in a Sep. 21 letter only after it had “learned that the secrecy of the facility was compromised”.
That administration claim was quickly accepted by major media outlets without any investigation of the facts. That story line is so deeply entrenched in media consciousness that even before Clinton’s remarks, Reuters and Associated Press had published reports from their Vienna correspondents that repeated the official Obama administration line that Iran had revealed the Fordow site only after Western intelligence had discovered it.
But the administration never offered the slightest evidence to support that assertion, and there is one major reason for doubting it: the United States did not inform the IAEA about any nuclear facility at Fordow until three days after Iran’s Sep. 21, 2009 formal letter notifying the IAEA of the Fordow enrichment facility, because the U.S. couldn’t be certain that it was a nuclear site.
Mohammed ElBaradei, then director general of the IAEA, reveals in his 2011 memoir that Robert Einhorn, the State Department’s special advisor for nonproliferation and arms control, informed him Sep. 24 about U.S. intelligence on the Fordow site – three days after the Iranian letter had been received.
An irritated ElBaradei demanded to know why he had not been told before the Iranian letter.
Einhorn responded that the United States “had not been sure of the nature of the facility”, ElBaradei wrote.
The administration’s claim that Iran announced the site because it believed U.S. intelligence had “identified it” was also belied by a set of questions and answers issued by the Obama administration on the same day as the press briefing. The answer it provided to the question, “Why did the Iranians decide to reveal this facility at this time,” was “We do not know.” Greg Thielmann, who was a top official in the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research until 2003 and was on the staff of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence during the 2009 episode, told this reporter the evidence for the claim that Iran believed the site had been discovered was “all circumstantial”.
Analysts were suspicious of the Iranian letter to the IAEA, Thielmann said, because, “it had the appearance of something put together hurriedly.”
But there is an alternative explanation: the decision to reveal the existence of a second prospective enrichment site – this one built into the side of a mountain – appears to have reflected the need to strengthen Iran’s hand in a meeting with the “P5 + 1″ group of state led by the United States that was only 10 days away. The Iranian announcement that it would participate in the meeting on Sep. 14, 2009 came on the same day that the head of Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi, warned against an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
The idea that Iran was planning to enrich uranium secretly at Fordow assumes that the Iranians were not aware that U.S. intelligence had been carrying out aerial surveillance of the site for years. That is hardly credible in light of the fact that the Mujahideen-E-Khalq (MEK), the armed opposition group with links to both U.S. and Israeli intelligence, had drawn attention to the Fordow site in a December 2005 press conference – well before it had been selected for a second enrichment plant. The MEK had also revealed the first Iranian enrichment site at Natanz in an August 2002 press conference, which had been the kickoff for the George W. Bush administration’s propaganda campaign charging Iran had maintained a covert nuclear programme ever since the 1980s.
But when the MEK identified the Natanz facility, Iran’s only commitment under its safeguards agreement with the IAEA was to inform the agency of any new nuclear facility 180 days before the introduction of nuclear material. That date was then still far in the future.
In November 2003, the Bush administration engineered the passage of resolution at the IAEA Governing Board meeting condemning Iran for “18 years of covert nuclear activity”.
In fact, Iran had announced openly in 1982 that they intended to have the capability to convert yellowcake into reactor fuel. In 1983, Iran asked the IAEA to help it build a pilot plant for uranium enrichment, but the U.S. government intervened to prevent the agency from doing so.
It was that U.S. political interference that forced Iran to purchase black market centrifuge technology from the A.Q. Khan network in 1987. But Iran openly negotiated with China, Argentina and six other governments for the purchase of nuclear energy and facilities in the 1980s and 1990s.
Despite those well-known facts, the Bush administration charge that Iran had operated a “clandestine nuclear program” for “18 years” quickly become an accepted fact inserted in many stories by major newspapers such the Washington Post, New York Times and Los Angeles Times.
In asserting that there was “no plausible justification” for Iran’s enrichment to 20 per cent, Clinton sought to refute Iran’s explanation that the 20 per cent enrichment is supply fuel for its Tehran Research Reactor (TRR).
“The P5+1 has offered alternatives for providing fuel for the TRR,” Clinton said. The proposal made by the P5+1 in 2009, however, was explicitly aimed at stripping Iran of the bulk of its stock of low-enriched uranium – a prospect that was widely criticized even among critics of President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad, including Mir Hossein Mousavi , his rival in the contested June 2009 presidential election.
The main reason for the resistance to the proposal appears to have been that Iran would have been deprived of its bargaining chips in relation to eventual negotiations with the United States.
When Iran agreed to a joint Brazilian-Turkish proposal for a swap in 2010 in June 2010, the Obama administration rejected it, because it left Iran with too much low enriched uranium.
It was after that rejection that Iran vowed to enrich uranium to 20 per cent unless it obtained a supply through other means. Iran also demonstrated at the 2011 IAEA Governing Board meeting that it was working on producing its own fuel plates for the TRR, according to former IAEA nuclear inspector Robert Kelley.
~
GARETH PORTER is an investigative historian and journalist with Inter-Press Service specialising in U.S. national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, “Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam“, was published in 2006.
Discord among Arab monitors as Russia warns of Syria intervention
Al-Akhbar, AFP | January 12, 2012
Head of the Arab League’s observer mission in Syria, Sudanese General Mustafa al-Dabi, branded as “baseless” claims by former monitor Algerian Anwar Malek that the Syrian regime was committing crimes against humanity.
On Wednesday, Malek told Doha-based Al Jazeera that he had quit the mission and accused the Syrian regime of committing a series of war crimes against its people and of duping his colleagues.
But Dabi said that Malek had barely left his hotel room when deployed in Homs.
“What observer Anwar Malek said on a satellite television is baseless,” General Mohammed Ahmed Mustafa al-Dabi, former head of Sudanese military intelligence, who leads the operations in Syria, said in a statement.
“Malek was deployed to Homs among a team, but for six days he did not leave his room and did not join members of the team on the ground, pretending he was sick,” Dabi said in the statement.
He echoed remarks by an unnamed Arab League official who said Malek was bedridden throughout his assignment in Homs and his accusations are unfounded.
“What I saw was a humanitarian disaster. The regime isn’t committing one war crime but a series of crimes against its people,” the Algerian observer told Al Jazeera.
“The mission was a farce and the observers have been fooled. The regime orchestrated it and fabricated most of what we saw to stop the Arab League from taking action against the regime,” Malek said.
According to Dabi, the Algerian monitor requested leave for medical treatment in Paris but departed before waiting for the green light.
An Arab League official noted that two monitors quit the mission, an Algerian (Malek) and a Sudanese, and claimed Malek left “for health reasons,” while the Sudanese “was returning to his country for personal reasons.”
“Two monitors have excused themselves, an Algerian and a Sudanese,” Syria operations chief Adnan Khodeir said at Arab League headquarters in Cairo.
Russia warns of Libya-repeat
Russian Security Council secretary Nikolai Patrushev warned that NATO and Gulf Arab states are plotting to intervene militarily in Syria along the lines of the Libya intervention that eventually ousted Muammar Gaddafi.
“There is information that NATO members and some Arab states of the Persian Gulf, acting in line with the scenario seen in Libya, intend to turn the current interference with Syrian affairs into a direct military intervention,” he said in an interview published on the website of the daily Kommersant.
“The main strike forces will be supplied not by France, Britain, and Italy, but possibly by neighboring Turkey.”
Washington and Ankara may already be working on plans for a no-fly zone to enable armed Syrian rebel units to build up, he said.
Similar fears were echoed by opposition figure Haytham al-Manna of the National Coordination Body for Democratic Change in Syria (NCB), who told Al-Akhbar two weeks ago that Gulf Arab states “might turn Syria into a battleground against Iran.”
Manna stressed Syrian revolutionaries “refuse to become the victims of a war by proxy.”
Patrushev’s comments come as Qatari Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani met with US Vice President Joe Biden at the White House on Wednesday to discuss the ongoing violence in Syria.
The pair “condemned the ongoing violence in Syria perpetrated by the Assad regime and noted the significance of the Arab League observer mission’s final report due on January 19,” the White House said.
The Arab League has come under fire for its observer mission from opposition groups and Syrian President Bashar Assad, both claiming the regional body is ineffective.
Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood accused the Arab monitors of “covering up” government crimes, while Assad also lambasted the League for bias against the regime in his speech on Tuesday.
But China expressed empathy with the Arab League, saying the regional body faced “difficulties” in monitoring the violence in Syria.
“The Syrian government and other Syrian parties should provide suitable conditions to allow the observers to carry out their work,” Wu Sike, China’s envoy to the Middle East, told reporters after meeting Arab League chief Nabil al-Arabi in Cairo on Thursday.
Wu voiced regret for attacks in the past few days targeting observers in Syria.
“We hope that the observers will be patient and will pursue their efforts until they achieve their goal for the sake of Syria and its people,” he added, when asked about reports that some monitors had quit the mission.
Two Kuwaiti monitors and one observer from the Arab League were slightly wounded in an attack on their convoy in Latakia on Monday.
An Arab League official on Wednesday said the trio suffered “minor cuts” when protesters broke the window of their vehicle.
Inquiry demanded over journalist death
Meanwhile, the Syrian National Council (SNC) – a main umbrella opposition organization that includes the Muslim Brotherhood as well as secular activists – accused the regime of killing French journalist Gilles Jacquier in Homs on Wednesday.
The SNC denounced the “murder” of Jacquier, saying in a statement it was a “dangerous sign that the authorities have decided to physically liquidate journalists in an attempt to silence neutral and independent media.”
Accounts of violence are difficult to verify as foreign journalists are not permitted to freely cover the crisis in Syria, but Mazen Darwich of the Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Speech told Al-Akhbar that it was unclear who was behind the attack.
Jacquier’s death, the first foreign journalist killed since the uprising began in Syria last March, occurred as he was covering a pro-regime rally in the Akramah neighborhood of Homs when RPGs fell on the crowd, killing nine in total, Darwich said.
A Belgian journalist, Steven Visner, was also critically wounded.
France demanded an inquiry into Jacquier’s death.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy said in a statement that “France expects the Syrian authorities to shed light on the death of a man who was simply doing his job: reporting.”
British Foreign Secretary William Hague condemned the attack, saying the “deaths highlight once again the terrible price being paid by the people of Homs, as well as the courage of journalists who take great personal risks to bring to light what is happening to the people of Syria.”
And EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton joined global press watchdog Reporters Without Borders in demanding a rapid inquiry.
The latest UN figures from mid-December have the death toll at over 5,000 since the Syrian uprising began last March.
Damascus has released its own figures, however, contending that 2,000 security personnel have been killed by armed groups.
Israel’s High Court upholds racist ‘Citizenship Law’ to avoid “national suicide”
By Ben White – The Electronic Intifada – 01/12/2012
Israel’s High Court has rejected a legal challenge to the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law (2003, amended 2007), in a 6-5 decision on Wednesday.
The law places severe restrictions on the ability of Palestinian citizens of Israel to live with spouses from the Occupied Palestinian Territories, as well as from so-called “enemy states” (defined as Syria, Lebanon, Iran and Iraq). The judges’ majority support for the state’s position affects thousands of couples, who had pinned their hopes on this appeal.
While the official justification for the almost decade-old law has typically been about ‘security’ (with the claim that family unification allows ‘terrorists’ to enter Israel), what is interesting about this High Court ruling and the response to it is just how explicitly the law is justified in terms of ‘demographics’.
In the ruling, Justice Asher Grunis wrote that “human rights are not a prescription for national suicide”, a term often used in the context of allowing a return of Palestinian refugees. Today, that language was repeated by Interior Minister Eli Yishai, warning about the need to protect the Jewish majority. MK Otniel Schneller (Kadima) also praised the High Court’s decision in terms of ethnic separation:
The High Court decision articulates the rationale of separation between the (two) peoples and the need to maintain a Jewish majority and the (Jewish) character of the state.
A similar reaction has been voiced by the extreme right in the Knesset, like National Union MK Yaakov Katz:
A fantastic miracle took place last night in the High Court when by a happenstance majority the State of Israel was saved from being flooded by 2-3 million Arab refugees.
Adalah, in a press release, commented:
The Supreme Court approved a law the likes of which do not exist in any democratic state in the world, depriving citizens from maintaining a family life in Israel only on the basis of the ethnicity or national belonging of their spouse. The ruling proves how much the situation regarding the civil rights of the Arab minority in Israel is declining into a highly dangerous and unprecedented situation.
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) also slammed the decision, stating that “the majority opinion has stamped its approval on a racist law, one [that] will harm the very texture of the lives of families whose only sin is the Palestinian blood that runs in their veins”.
Israeli court rules against citizenship for Palestinians married to Israelis
By Saed Bannoura | IMEMC News | January 12, 2012
Mixed Palestinian-Israeli families that have been in limbo since the Israeli legislature passed an ‘emergency, security measure’ in 2003 will remain in limbo for the foreseeable future, after the Israeli High Court on Wednesday rejected a petition that would allow these families to stay together.
Israel’s controversial ‘Citizenship Law’ provides for the naturalization of any person of Jewish descent to become an Israeli citizen (known as the ‘Law of Return’). The law also includes provisions that make it difficult for non-Jews to be naturalized as Israeli citizens. Until 2003, non-Jewish people (including Palestinians) who were married to Israeli citizens could go through a process to become citizens.
But the Israeli Knesset passed a measure in 2003 banning Palestinians married to Israelis from obtaining Israeli citizenship. The measure was called a temporary security law allegedly meant to prevent Palestinian fighters from entering Israel to carry out attacks. It has remained in place in the nine years since, and there are no plans in the Knesset to revoke the law.
In 2007, the law was expanded to include nationals of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon who are married to Israelis.
The ruling on Wednesday affects over 100,000 Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza who are married to Israeli citizens. These Palestinians live in limbo, constantly having to apply for permits to be able to be with their spouses, and never knowing if the permit will be granted. They are forbidden from driving or holding jobs in Israel, making their daily lives extremely difficult and stressful.
In a 2008 expose, the BBC interviewed Mohammed and Lana Khatib, who are unable to live together because of the Citizenship Law amendment. She is from Jenin, in the West Bank, and he is a citizen of Israel. He told reporters that their situation was “very insecure. Maybe one day they won’t give her the permission and I’ll be left alone with two kids.”
Israeli soldiers raid office, home of detained journalist
Ma’an – 12/01/2012
NABLUS – Israeli military forces on Thursday confiscated computers, mobile phones and camera memory cards from the office and home of a Palestinian journalist.
Soldiers raided Amin Abu Warda’s office in Nablus at 3 a.m., his colleague Atef Doughlas told Ma’an, and confiscated several items, including a work computer and mobile phone.
Witnesses said Israeli forces also raided Abu Warda’s home and confiscated his personal mobile and laptop as well as his son’s mobile phone.
Abu Warda has been held in Israeli detention since Dec. 28, 2011. The journalist is being held without charge and has not been allowed to speak with a lawyer.
An Israeli court issued a decision to extend his arrest until January 15, 2012.
Palestinian media freedom group MADA slammed the arrest, saying it “stands in direct contravention to Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees the right to freedom of opinion and expression.”
The group said Thursday that Israeli forces had escalated violations against journalists in December, with six journalists injured by gas projectiles fired at demonstrations.
Featured Video
‘Never vaccinated’ vs ‘Ever vaccinated’ mortality rate illusion
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Psychiatric drugs kill 500k+ Western adults annually, few positive benefits – leading scientist
RT | May 13, 2015
Psychiatric drugs lead to the deaths of over 500,000 people aged 65 and over annually in the West, a Danish scientist says. He warns the benefits of these drugs are “minimal,” and have been vastly overstated.
Research director at Denmark’s Nordic Cochrane Centre, Professor Peter Gøtzsche, says the use of most antidepressants and dementia drugs could be halted without inflicting harm on patients. The Danish scientist’s views were published in the British Medical Journal on Tuesday.
His scathing analysis will likely prove controversial among traditional medics. However, concern is mounting among doctors and scientists worldwide that psychiatric medication is doing more harm than good. In particular, they say antipsychotic drugs have been over-prescribed to many dementia patients in a bid to calm agitated behavior.
Gøtzsche warns psychiatric drugs kill patients year in year out, and hold few positive benefits. He says in excess of half a million citizens across the Western world aged 65 and over die annually as a result of taking these drugs.
“Their benefits would need to be colossal to justify this, but they are minimal,” he writes.
“Given their lack of benefit, I estimate we could stop almost all psychotropic drugs without causing harm.”
Gøtzsche, who is also a clinical trials expert, says drug trials funded by big pharmaceutical companies tend to produce biased results because many patients took other medication prior to the tests.
He says patients cease taking the old drugs and then experience a phase of withdrawal prior to taking the trial pharmaceuticals, which appear highly beneficial at first.
The Danish professor also warns fatalities from suicides in clinical trials are significantly under-reported. … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
jbthring on Iraq war is epitomy of media… michael on Serbs Aware of UK’s… roberthstiver on Putin and Xi Standing Firm on… roberthstiver on Putin and Xi Standing Firm on… Thomas Lee Simpson on Why hypersonic weapons change… Bill Francis on Why I don’t believe there ever… spy on this on I am the “US-based Kremlin int… Balthasar Gerards on Why I don’t believe there ever… Thomas Lee Simpson on Biden fails to dismiss censors… 5 dancing shlomos on Is Dr. Malone Invested in Huma… Pip on Mom files lawsuit after being… jbthring on Setting the record straight on…
Aletho News- Ron Unz: JFK Assassination, Iranian Channel Four TV (IRIB) March 24, 2023
- Mexican President Says Trump Arrest is About Keeping Him Off the Ballot March 23, 2023
- Russian governor’s son flees house arrest in Italy March 23, 2023
- Turkiye ‘reviewing options’ for Syria withdrawal: Report March 23, 2023
- Iraq war is epitomy of media duplicity March 23, 2023
- US to build new military bases near South China Sea March 23, 2023
- Why hypersonic weapons change everything March 23, 2023
- Serbs Aware of UK’s ‘Gift’ for Ukraine: NATO Poisoned Serbia’s Soil for Billions of Years to Come March 23, 2023
- Putin and Xi Standing Firm on the Right Side of History March 23, 2023
- Western Sanctions Targeting Russians Failed, PM Mishustin Says March 23, 2023
- Russia’s economy recovers while dozens of US banks face collapse March 23, 2023
- ‘Never vaccinated’ vs ‘Ever vaccinated’ mortality rate illusion: Survivor bias and how to overcome it March 23, 2023
- Indiana’s Bureau of Motor Vehicles is caught collecting and selling personal data March 23, 2023
- I am the “US-based Kremlin intermediary” that tried to help Tucker Carlson book an interview with Putin March 23, 2023
- Mom files lawsuit after being reported to law enforcement for questioning “polysexual” school poster March 22, 2023
- Biden fails to dismiss censorship collusion lawsuit March 22, 2023
- Is Dr. Malone Invested in Humanity or Transhumanism? March 22, 2023
- Why I don’t believe there ever was a Covid virus March 22, 2023
- If Americans Knew
- Bezalel Smotrich calls a lie “the biblical truth” March 22, 2023
- Joel Osteen’s startling interview with Bibi Netanyahu March 20, 2023
- Thursday-Friday: Israeli forces kill 5 Palestinians March 18, 2023
- Brownstone Institute
- How They Convinced Trump to Lock Down March 23, 2023
- The Lab Leak and the Counter Measures: What Really Happened March 23, 2023
- The Latest in the War on Science March 23, 2023
- The Covid Disaster was Foreshadowed with Love Canal March 23, 2023
- The Real Trauma of Love Canal March 22, 2023
- The Narrative in Retreat March 22, 2023
- Richie Allen
- Bordeaux Town Hall Burnt Down By Pension Reform Protesters March 24, 2023
- Scottish Schools Tell Kids There Are THREE Biological Sexes March 24, 2023
- Greta Thunberg To Sue Sweden For Climate Change Inaction March 23, 2023
- USA Today Names BLOKE In WOMEN Of The Year List March 23, 2023
- Not A Lot Of People Know That
- Dutch farmers on collision course with Brussels over compulsory farm buyouts March 24, 2023
- Prominent physicist warns that wind power “fails on every count” March 23, 2023
- Rural Homes Will Be Forced To Install Unaffordable Heat Pumps March 23, 2023
- Met Office & Their Opinion Poll March 22, 2023
- No Tricks Zone
- Consent Factory
- The Censorship Industrial Complex March 10, 2023
Aletho News 